Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stent vs. contemporary durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Aims The biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) offer controlled drug elution and complete degradation of the polymer over time, eventually lowering the risk for chronic inflammation and neoatherosclerosis, which can be particularly helpful in patients with diabetes. While BP-DE...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes 2020-01, Vol.6 (1), p.81-88
Hauptverfasser: Bavishi, Chirag, Chugh, Yashasvi, Kimura, Takeshi, Natsuaki, Masahiro, Kaiser, Christoph, Gordon, Paul, Aronow, Herbert D, Abbott, Jinnette Dawn
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Aims The biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) offer controlled drug elution and complete degradation of the polymer over time, eventually lowering the risk for chronic inflammation and neoatherosclerosis, which can be particularly helpful in patients with diabetes. While BP-DES and durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) have demonstrated comparable efficacy in all-comers population, their efficacy and safety in patients with diabetes remains uncertain. Methods and results Electronic databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing BP-DES with contemporary DP-DES in patients with diabetes. Study investigators were contacted to obtain additional data. The primary outcome was efficacy in terms of target-vessel revascularization (TVR) and target-lesion revascularization (TLR). We also evaluated the following safety outcomes separately: all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and definite or probable stent thrombosis. Eleven RCTs including 5190 diabetic patients were included. At the longest available follow-up (mean 2.7 years), there was no significant difference in TLR [relative risk (RR): 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85–1.24; P = 0.80] or TVR (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.81–1.34; P = 0.76). Safety outcomes of all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and MI were similar between the two groups. Stent thrombosis rates were also similar between BP-DES and DP-DES groups (1.66% vs. 1.83%; RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.54–1.31; P = 0.45). The heterogeneity was low and fixed-effect model yielded similar results. Meta-regression analysis showed no relationship between insulin requiring diabetes and difference in TLR or stent thrombosis between BP-DES and DP-DES. Conclusion Overall, BP-DESs have similar safety and efficacy profiles compared to contemporary DP-DES in patients with diabetes.
ISSN:2058-5225
2058-1742
DOI:10.1093/ehjqcco/qcz031